There have been several columnists pointing out the error in this line of reasoning .... if it can even be called reasoning.
I honestly don't get it.
I don't either. As long as whatever someone does behind closed doors (or out of sight of anyone not wishing to participate) involves only consenting adults (if more than one person), does not impact anyone else in a negative fashion, does not scare the farm animals, or bring about swarms of locusts I see no problem with it.
I had a friend who was an enigma. He was an ordained minister who sold insurance (conflict there somewhere) and as such fairly was anti-homosexual because that is what most of the major churches taught around here. His son was gay and we had a lot of discussions over the science being against choice and how it happened in nature as well. He finally was able to come to terms with the situation after confirming it was something his son was born with and as such was not a choice. Now his son has two children through a surrogate mother and they are two of the happiest grandparents you would ever want to meet. I believe they even voted against the recent amendment too.
When I was 5, a phenominal pair of female taller than me told me that I was heterosexual. I didn't have any part in the decision, but I've been quite happy with myself ever since.
Man, I remember those legs to this day.
You should see the pictures of me with my first homecoming date. She was a senior and the homecoming queen while I was the dashing three year old in the baby blue suit. I did not get lucky that night, but I am told I did have roaming hands once or twice. She liked the way I played the pinball machine at the drugstore (I needed a stool to see over the edge) and would light my pipe for me sometimes. Yes, I smoked a pipe while I beat the pinball machine. I also drank beer when given the chance and was known to read certain men's magazines too. I was often abel to embarrass my momn with those antics fueld by some cool uncles and their friends.
Wayne Stollings wrote:
I am pushing for a real amendment to protect marriage,
I wouldn't mind seeing it abolished altogether, at least in terms of government legally recognizing it. Make it simple--if two entities want to sign some binding contract amongst themselves, have them hire an attorney like everyone else. That way, there's no question as to who can and can't as it removes religious influence and personal preference. It's anyone with a will and a way. Hell, we don't even have to limit it to two either.
Works for me.